With the passing of Justice Muhammad Lawal Uwais, Nigeria bids farewell to one of its most revered jurists — a towering figure whose influence shaped the judiciary and democratic ethos of the nation. JOSEPH ONYEKWERE and AMEH OCHOJILA revisit the life and times of the former Chief Justice, reflecting on his judicial legacy, his bold advocacy for electoral reform, and the enduring imprint he left on Nigeria’s legal and institutional framework.

“A judge is not to tilt the scales of justice but to weigh the evidence and apply the law,” the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Potter Stewart, once remarked—a principle that Honourable Justice Muhammad Lawal Uwais lived by with unwavering discipline. Stewart, known for his moderate and pragmatic approach to the American Supreme Court, often resisted ideological extremes, insisting that the law must be interpreted with balance, fairness, and fidelity to principles.

In much the same way, Justice Uwais carried the moral weight of Nigeria’s judiciary with calm precision, never swayed by power or sentiment, always anchoring his judgments in law and conscience. His passing is not just the end of a judicial career—it is the quiet exit of a man whose life stood as testimony to what the Bench ought to be: fair, firm, and deeply just.

The passing of Justice Uwais, former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), no doubt marks not just the end of a man but an institution—a towering judicial iroko whose influence transcended the Bench and reached deep into the very foundations of Nigeria’s democracy.

At 89, Uwais left behind not only a remarkable legal legacy but also a standard of integrity, intellect, and reformist fervour that many argue is sorely missing in today’s judiciary.
As Nigerians reflect on his life and times, one theme runs through the tributes and analyses of his career: unwavering dedication to justice and the rule of law. From his early days in Zaria to the pinnacle of judicial leadership, Uwais remained consistent in his pursuit of fairness, discipline, and institutional reform.

Born on June 12, 1936, in Zaria, Kaduna State, Uwais embarked on a legal journey that would eventually span over three decades. He was called to the Bar at the prestigious Middle Temple in London in 1963, a notable achievement in an era when few Nigerians reached such heights in legal education abroad. Returning home, he began his career as a State Counsel in the Northern Region and rapidly ascended the judicial ladder.

By 36, Uwais was already serving on the High Court Bench as it then was. At 41, he was at the Federal Court of Appeal, and by 43, he had ascended to the Supreme Court—a meteoric rise powered by brilliance, integrity, and an unwavering commitment to the legal profession.

In 1995, during a turbulent period in Nigeria’s political history, he was appointed Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), a position he held until 2006. His 11-year tenure as CJN—still one of the longest in Nigeria’s history—was marked by judicial reforms, stability, and the promotion of judicial independence.

His stewardship came at a time when Nigeria was transitioning from military rule to democratic governance, and his leadership helped reinforce the judiciary’s relevance during that precarious transformation.

Justice Uwais’s career is most defined by his unblemished record of service and his insistence on judicial autonomy. His role in insulating the judiciary from political interference stands out as a critical pillar of his legacy, unlike now when the judicial system is enmeshed in allegations of political interference in judicial activities.

Many of his contemporaries and legal scholars have spoken glowingly of his incorruptibility and measured temperament. Tayo Oyetibo (SAN), aptly described him as “a gentleman par excellence” whose judgments exhibited “admirable consistency.”

According to Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa (SAN), who also paid tribute to his legacy, called for the implementation of the Uwais Report on electoral reform as a befitting way to honour the late jurist.

Indeed, Uwais’s judicial contributions were not just about delivering verdicts. He actively helped shape the Bench itself. As Chairman of both the National Judicial Council and the Nigerian Body of Benchers, Uwais was instrumental in setting standards for judicial appointments and discipline. His leadership ensured that meritocracy—rather than political patronage—remained the principal yardstick for judicial elevation during his time.

Perhaps the most politically consequential role Uwais played after his retirement was as Chairman of the Electoral Reform Committee set up by the Federal Government in 2007. Coming just after the widely criticised 2007 elections, the Uwais Committee was tasked with diagnosing and recommending solutions to Nigeria’s recurring electoral challenges.

The resulting “Uwais Report” was a landmark document that boldly addressed the structural deficiencies of Nigeria’s electoral system. Among its key recommendations were: The creation of an independent Electoral Offences Commission to prosecute electoral malpractice; A more transparent and non-executive-led appointment process for the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC); and empowering the judiciary to annul elections without undue procedural delays.

Although the report has largely remained unimplemented, it continues to serve as a reference point for electoral reform debates. The reluctance of successive governments to implement their bold proposals is, in itself, a commentary on the enduring relevance—and the political inconvenience—of Uwais’s recommendations.

With Nigeria’s electoral system still plagued by credibility issues, calls for the current administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to revisit and implement the Uwais Report are once again resonating. As Adegboruwa noted, implementing the report would be the most enduring tribute to Uwais’s legacy—a way of breathing life into the values he lived by.

Justice Uwais was not just a national figure but a globally respected jurist. His honorary titles and international engagements speak volumes. He served as Honorary President of the World Jurist Association, Washington D.C., and was a member of the Board of Trustees of the Global Legal Information Network Foundation.

At home, he chaired numerous tribunals and commissions of inquiry—roles that underscored the trust reposed in him by successive governments, both military and civilian.

From investigating the Jimeta Disturbances in 1984 to probing military contract awards in the North Central State in 1976, Uwais brought the same calm rigour and principled objectivity that defined his courtroom presence. He also served as Chancellor of Umaru Musa Yar’Adua University, Katsina, affirming his commitment to legal and educational development beyond the Bench.

Uwais’s judicial philosophy was simple yet profound: justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done. His judgments were characterised by their clarity, legal reasoning, and faithfulness to the Constitution. He was a unifying presence on the Supreme Court Bench, bridging ideological divides with tact and legal depth.

In an era where concerns abound about judicial compromise and increasing fraternisation between the judiciary and politically exposed persons, Uwais’s life offers a stark—and sobering—contrast. His example reminds Nigerians of what is possible when public office is held with integrity, purpose, and vision.

His death is not just the loss of a former Chief Justice; it is the passing of an era. An era where the law was not wielded for political convenience, but as a tool for justice and societal progress.

While Uwais’s passing is a moment of mourning, it must also be a moment of reckoning. The Nigeria he left behind is still grappling with many of the same issues he sought to fix—especially the deeply flawed electoral system. It is fitting, therefore, that his death has renewed calls for the implementation of the Uwais Report. The Independent National Electoral Commission continues to be a lightning rod for controversy, and Nigeria’s elections—though improved in some respects—remain marred by logistics failures, voter suppression, and credibility concerns.

Justice Uwais no doubt offered a blueprint for change. What is lacking is political will. In honouring his memory, Nigerians must pressure their leaders to revisit and implement the structural reforms he championed. According to available tributes to Uwais, Uwais’s life was the embodiment of judicial excellence, moral uprightness, and visionary leadership. He was a legal craftsman, a reformist, and a statesman—qualities that earned him the title of a judicial iroko in Nigeria’s legal forest.

Available documents show that His contributions to electoral jurisprudence, judicial independence, and national development are enduring. But his ultimate legacy will be determined not just by his accomplishments, but by what the nation chooses to do with them.
To forget Uwais would be to squander a rare opportunity to build a judiciary and democratic process founded on integrity, merit, and justice. To honour him, however, is to act—urgently and deliberately—on the ideals he upheld and the reforms he proposed.

As Nigeria marks his passing, may it also mark a new beginning: one in which his legacy is not merely celebrated in words, but etched in action. The Supreme Court of Nigeria, in a statement released, described Justice Muhammadu Lawal Uwais as a distinguished legal luminary and the 9th Chief Justice of Nigeria.

As Chief Justice from 1995 to 2006, Uwais led critical judicial reforms, notably spearheading the establishment of the National Judicial Council (NJC), which remains central to upholding the independence and integrity of the Nigerian judiciary. He was equally committed to advancing legal education and mentoring young lawyers and judges.

His professional achievements and deep-rooted commitment to judicial excellence left an indelible mark on Nigeria’s legal landscape. The Supreme Court, in mourning his loss, emphasised his tireless dedication to the rule of law and the values that shaped a generation of jurists.

Also, in a striking reflection on the passing of Justice Uwais, legal scholar Dr Tonye Clinton Jaja likens the late jurist to a truly irreplaceable figure—a stark contrast to the fleeting bonds described in Beyoncé’s popular anthem – Irreplaceable. While that song became a rallying cry for disposability in relationships, Jaja insists that some individuals, like Justice Uwais, simply cannot be replaced—neither in jurisprudence nor in moral clarity.

According to Jaja, Uwais exemplified the highest standard of judicial courage, delivering judgments that were not only legally sound but also ethically grounded and unflinchingly principled. He notes that among the numerous decisions authored by Uwais, there are a select few that continue to stand as unmatched precedents in Nigeria’s constitutional and legal development—decisions that have rarely, if ever, been repeated in spirit or boldness.

Jaja said one of such decisions involved a case where the Supreme Court upheld the authority of a Speaker to declare a lawmaker’s seat vacant due to absenteeism, despite the absence not meeting the full constitutional threshold.

Jaja sees this as a rare moment of judicial bravery, particularly when compared with more recent cases where procedural technicalities are used to justify legislative impunity, such as the controversy surrounding the 27 lawmakers in Rivers State.

He recalls how his own efforts to expose absenteeism in a state assembly triggered severe backlash—emphasising how sensitive, and increasingly opaque, legislative accountability has become.

In another landmark case, Jaja said Uwais firmly established that the Attorney-General’s power to withdraw criminal charges must be exercised solely in the overriding public interest, not for personal or political expediency. Jaja laments how, in contrast, current legal authorities have wielded this discretion in ways that appear tailored to protect privileged individuals rather than uphold justice.

Uwais also broke ground by affirming the constitutional right of private individuals and non-governmental organisations to establish private universities, a position that broadened the scope of educational development in the country.

His ruling on legislative procedure was equally rigorous—insisting that all stages of the constitutionally prescribed lawmaking process must be followed, regardless of administrative shortcuts or political convenience. Perhaps most strikingly, in grappling with the doctrine of locus standi, Uwais sought to balance access to justice with the need to filter out frivolous or self-serving litigation. This measured view revealed a jurist concerned not just with legal outcomes, but with the integrity of the justice system itself.

Jaja’s analysis concludes with a sobering note: the era of jurists like Uwais—men of immense moral strength, legal acuity, and ethical clarity—is gradually fading. In their place, a new generation is emerging, one whose commitment to courage and principle remains uncertain. In that light, the passing of Justice Uwais is not just the loss of a man—it is the slow retreat of a judicial tradition grounded in fearlessness, accountability, and a steadfast commitment to justice.

However, a legal scholar, Sylvester Udemezue, argued that Justice Uwais, as Nigeria’s CJN, “did not leave indelible positive marks behind.” He insisted that all former CJNs, as well as the current one, including Justice Uwais, were unsuccessful in discharging the responsibilities of their office in a manner that could justifiably qualify any of them as having left “indelible positive marks behind.”

His words: “Sadly, with due respect, the current CJN appears set to end her tenure as perhaps among the worst of them all. If we are to face reality and insist on substance over sentiment, I respectfully challenge anyone to point to a single ‘indelible positive mark’ left behind by any former CJN, including Hon. Justice Uwais.”

He argued that if they had succeeded, Nigerian judges would not still record court proceedings in longhand. He insisted that the Supreme Court remains arguably the most disorganised, inconsistent, and ineffective apex court in the world.

“No coherent case management system exists, and decisions are often riddled with contradictions, leading to a serious crisis of judicial credibility. It is also the slowest Supreme Court in the world, routinely taking between six and 15 years to determine appeals before it. Many matters before it are simply adjourned indefinitely or for an unduly long time, sometimes for up to three to four years, thereby defeating the fundamental principle that justice delayed is justice denied.

“In other jurisdictions, it is the Chief Justice who typically leads initiatives toward meaningful pragmatic policy reforms and effective progress in justice delivery. But in Nigeria, what practical and pragmatic reforms has any CJN truly embarked upon? Where, then, are the so-called ‘indelible positive footprints’? Or are we perhaps confused about what actually constitutes positive footprints in reality? Can there be any such footprints in the absence of genuine progress?

“The notion of ‘high-profile cases’ in Nigeria, and the undue attention these cases receive, often at the expense of regular or so-called ‘low-profile’ cases, is both thoughtless and indefensible. It has no place in any judicial system that aspires to fairness and effectiveness. In a truly functional and just legal system, all cases, regardless of the status, wealth, or influence of the parties involved, ought to receive equal treatment, attention, and expedition. Justice should not be stratified. Yet in Nigeria, our courts have institutionalised this senseless distinction, where high-profile cases are given priority and fast-tracked, while the everyday matters affecting ordinary citizens are neglected, delayed, and treated as secondary.

“This judicial partiality not only perpetuates systemic discrimination but also deepens the already troubling divide between the elite and the masses. It is, therefore, increasingly difficult to uphold in Nigeria the oft-repeated saying that ‘the court is the last hope of the common man.’ If anything, the reality seems to be the reverse: Nigerian courts appear structured and sustained through public funds, primarily to serve the interests of the privileged few, leaving the common man to his fate! The pressing question then becomes: where were the successive CJNs while this grave injustice took root and became normalised? What reforms did they initiate, or fail to initiate, to correct this inequity? Their silence and inaction raise serious concerns about the true legacy they have left behind,” Udemezue, who is the Proctor, The Reality Ministry of Truth, Law and Justice in Nigeria, declared.